Supreme Court rules that Prince Charles' lobbying letters to Ministers must be made public
Posted on
Roger applauded the Supreme Court's decision that Prince Charles' lobbying letters to Ministers must be released under Freedom of Information legislation as a triumph for democracy and transparency.
He commented: "It is ridiculous that in 2015 we have a hereditary head of state with no accountability to citizens or to Parliament, and no requirement that he is competent or suitable for the role. However, given that that is what we have, then at the very least we as citizens must demand transparency about Charles' role and whether he is damaging his own position by lobbying Ministers.
"The former attorney general blocked the publication of these letters on the grounds that their contents might undermine Charles' position of political neutrality and thus his suitability for the role of king. In my view, this is a very strong argument that the letters should be published. If Charles has damaged his own neutrality by his meddling, then we as citizens should have the right to know about this and to decide whether we want him 'ruling' over us."
Rather than standing up for the principle that power should be held accountable to citizens, David Cameron responded to the ruling by saying that he wanted to change the law to increase Ministers' powers to veto the release of information. Nick Clegg's position was to prioritise the "privacy" of Charles' correspondence over the right of UK citizens to know exactly what he is lobbying their elected Government about.
Said Roger: "It beggars belief that Prime Minister and his deputy are more concerned to guard the already-damaged reputation of the heir to the throne than to ensure proper accountability to the people they are elected to serve. UK citizens are not given a choice about whether they want vast amounts of taxpayers' money to be wasted on Charles' extravagant lifestyle. They should at least be allowed to know whether he has disqualified himself from office by his meddling and lack of political impartiality, and to decide whether or not they want him to be king."
